“We are more likely to face prolonged campaigns than conflicts that are resolved quickly… that control of escalation is becoming more difficult and more important… and that as a hedge against unpredictability with reduced resources, we may have to adjust our global posture.”

These lines from the chairman’s foreword to theThe National Military Strategy of the United States of America, 2015provide the greatest insight into the view that the United States has on world affairs. While being essentially bound by US exceptionalism it presents an uncompromising analysis of the future that faces all of us. Most importantly it acknowledges that:

Wars will be longer.

Crises will continue to escalate rapidly and out-of-control.

The US will adjust its ‘global posture’ and introduce new methods of warfare.

These characteristics of future conflicts reinforce “the need for the U.S. military to remain globally engaged to shape the security environment and to preserve our network of alliances”. This is the opposite of what John Mearsheimer advocates in his excellent article titled America Unhinged, in which he sees the degradation of US credibility and society as stemming from its perpetual interventionism and warfare. Mearsheimer concludes that for the US to remain a global power and remove itself from unnecessary, unwinnable conflicts its leaders need to focus on direct threats to stability. What the 2015 military strategy presents is a several steps in the opposite direction. Framed by uncertainty and the view that threats are ever numerous and constantly evolving, the US is doubling down on its militarism and quest for supremacy.

The United States still sees individual states as the most dominant actors and pertinent threats, singling out Russia, Iran, North Korea and China. What is interesting to note is that the assessment of the direct military threat of these nations is far more level headed than the outright warmongering of western leaders and the mainstream press. Nonetheless, while the rhetoric employed in describing these threats appears to be relatively diplomatic, this is in direct contradiction to increasingly aggressive US militarism, especially in Europe. The assessment of these threats also ignores the US actions that have led to global reactions which are now deemed as aggressive.

What is most interesting about the military strategy is that while it acknowledges that individual state actors are the greatest threats, conflicts will be fought primarily against ‘hybrid forces’. The key examples given are that of “Russia… in the Crimea” and “ISIL… in Iraq and Syria”. The situation in Donbass is labelled a ‘hybrid conflict’ but there is no concrete accusation of Russia directly supporting these forces, instead a vague wording that is open to being misconstrued by the mainstream press. As is to be expected, the US hypocritically points to aggressor nations as solely employing these tactics, making no mention of US funding and training of ‘rebel’ groups in Syria and Iraq. Of greatest importance in this section of the strategy is the concession that none of the nations mentioned are seeking “military conflict with the United States” or its allies. This is certainly a view that the media coverage of world affairs has great difficulty reconciling with.

The 2015 military strategy sees its objectives as being guided by national security interests (NSIs) which are put forward as being:

The survival of the Nation.

The prevention of catastrophic attack against U.S. territory.

The security of the global economic system.

The security, confidence, and reliability of our allies.

The protection of American citizens abroad.

The preservation and extension of universal values.

These are understandable objectives but they exist in a state of American exceptionalism, wherein the United States can protect its citizens abroad but Russia cannot. Similarly the US can preserve and extend its definition of ‘universal values’, but if Russia does so it is seen as being aggressive. While these objectives and the perceived threats to them are put forward in solid terms, the definitions of future conflicts and how they will be fought are marked with ambiguity. There is a definite undertone of uncertainty in this updated military strategy, but there is no question that when it comes to the protection of ‘US interests’ the policy is still of swift and certain military action. A particularly interesting aspect of the strategy as a whole is the capitalisation of ‘Nation’ in reference to the United States. When the word nation(s) is used in plural context it is written in lower case, but when referring only to the US it is capitalised. A small point perhaps, but in keeping with the absolute exceptionalism of US interests.

This strategy is characterised by the viewpoint of “the increasing complexity of the global environment, driven by rapid and profound change”, seeing the world as increasingly chaotic and conflict-bound. Judging by this paper, the future is to be defined by drawn-out conflicts influenced by the need of the United States to retain global supremacy and access to resources. The US still sees itself as the biggest and the best, other nations still exist solely for the pursuance of US interests and as the inimitable George H.W Bush put it: “either you are with us or you are with the terrorists” (perhaps Obama will change ‘terrorists’ to ‘Russians’ to better fit the contemporary agenda).

Reblogged this on Worldtruth and commented:
The 2015 National Military Strategy of the USA sees it’s objectives as being guided by NSIs(National Security Interests) seeming to be a mix of self delusion and the continuance of destructive interference and aggression by stealth or open hostility using force. The interests, as outlined in the strategy, may seem reasonable but for the skewed vision of US “exceptionalism” they themselves are the only ones allowed to pursue those strategies. For instance, the US may protect it’s citizens wherever they are – but another country such as Russia, may not, deeming another country’s actions as aggressive. Which is exactly what it has done in the case of Crimea. The US also seems set to preserve and extend (pursue and impose by whatever means) it’s own twisted misconception of what constitutes “universal values” which they are most certainly not. Given the way they govern their own country and condone the activities of the nazi regime of Israel, the Human Rights Violations of the Saudis and the breaking of the Minsk Agreement 1 by Kiev and the Ukraine ethnic cleansing programme, they are, to put it mildly, somewhat detached from reality. Such double standards of corrupt thinking are not “universal values”. The fact that the strategy lists their own tactics of state sponsored terrorist interventionism in destabilizing nation states, the pursuit of ever more advanced and destructive military technologies, cyber warfare, and bringing misery to countless people, using misinformation and outright lies by means of propaganda and failure to observe International Rules of warfare as in the case of the Geneva Conventions, the UN charter – many of the GA conventions they have refused to ratify, where they themselves might be held accountable, the Helsinki Accords which they broke, the Paris Charter which they have dismissed, the NATO agreement they have reneged on and last but not least, the agreement they also signed: the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, shows a certain lack of perception of their own guilt. Mea Culpa does not exist in their mindset. Think of the old saying “Oh for the gift that God did gee us, to see ourselves as others see us” (Robbie Burns – Scottish poet) and you have an inkling into the warped mentality of the US mentality.This whole misconception of their own righteousness has so infected their psyche that they have not realized who and what they truly are. According to Andrey Panevin who takes note from John Mearsheimer in an article called “America Unhinged” described as excellent, who sees the degradation of US credibility and society as stemming from its perpetual interventionism and warfare. The 2015 Military Strategy would seem to bear witness to the assessment by many countries now, of America’s addiction to its own dogma of World Domination by fair and foul means without recognising the “Mr Hyde” persona now controlling them. The strategy completely overlooks the irony of it’s advice – condemning strategy applicable to others, which the US itself employs.Unhinged is putting it mildly Mr. Mearsheimer.

IRAN HAS NO NUKES: Is the truth I posted about 4 years ago all over the internet. The New World Order news media That includes all of the Israel connected news, and the us Main Stream Media. have created all sorts of alarm language for more than 8 years that includes so call conservative site like Fox News. They claimed Iran would have nukes in two weeks. (8 years ago). In contrast Israel and US CIA have been behind wars all over the mid east since the US CIA destroyed the World Trade Center buildings by explosives on 911. The US political parties and Israel Gov have acted like Paranoid Schizophrenic homicidal maniacs. That is where the maniac murders people to justify its other self hate then gets paranoid that somebody will do something in retaliation.
Iran has specifically been refining Uranium to run its first nuclear reactor, a harmless reactor built by Russia/Putin. Russia purposely did not build a breeder reactor which could be used to process more hot uranium. Yet the New World Order news raised one of its lying alarms that the reactor was going to be loaded with uranium and thus could start breeding hotter uranium or even plutonium to make bombs. FACT: Iran has been slowed by sanctions such that it can not even run its one reactor and must purchase material from Russia/Putin. Iran envisions building more reactors but is hampered by all the lying New World Order news.
Israel is shown itself to be a war monger firing the US news fuel to try to get the US to bomb Iran. They were extremely angry when Obama hesitated at their demand to bomb the Iran nuke process site. Israel does not care that the US would create a war crime and fill the atmosphere with raw uranium. Israel is the war monger that helped start the Syrian war.
As Israel has chosen to bomb Gaza killing women and children twice now the US should re-assess and downgrade its connections with Israel. They are always anxious to us the US army to help them. Notice as the Paranoid Skizophrenic Tiny Israel creates hate in the mid east then becomes parinoid that the Iranians will finally do something about it. Its not Iran does not have nukes but its likely Israel does as they just tested one in the desert a couple weeks ago claiming it was a dirty bomb test (big lie). The problem is that Israel gov is atheist and appears mentally deranged. Dr. Ronald Cutburth, Ph.D., Management of Engineering Science Operations, engineering scientist, automation expert laser optic expert, intelligence expert.

IRAN HAS NO NUKES: Iran is not trying to build nukes. As part of the New World Order lies to create hysteria, the Main Stream media (NWO) claimed several months ago that Iran is making intelligence research to find how to build nukes. Thus everybody needs to fear Iran Anyone can do a Google search and get a long list of ideas on how to build nukes. The how to build nukes has been in public libraries since the 1970s. To boost the hysteria, the New World Order news reported oh say about 2 months ago that Iran has made advancement in long range missiles. Then they claim this is to support their nuclear weapons work. All false. How many thousands more US military does Israel want killed to satisfy the schizophrenic thinking. Confirmed today July 8, 2015 Dr. Ronald Cutburth. IRAN HAS NO NUKES!!

There should be no ambiguity. IRAN HAS NO NUKES. Israel and its NEW WORLD ORDER friends use their global news media to distort all issues. Thus the US military follows the Israel paranoid schizophrenia to establish policy.